Samsung Chosen to Supply 80 Percent of Apple's Future A-Series Chips for iOS Devices

[fertilized-egg]

I don't care TSMC is raking money from mid-tier class products like 30+ nm and even with 20nm class ones. I never stated that TSMC is in trouble financially.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't care about TSMC because they aren't leading in technology but in the same sentence you say you don't care about them being a leader with the 20nm process even though that's the cutting edge? For your argument to make any sense, TSMC has to be failing with 20nm and even 28nm. But TSMC is having huge success with them.

Basically you already made your up mind - TSMC cannot be good - and trying really hard to make the evidence fit your foregone conclusion. That's not how this works. Unfortunately at Macrumors there are many who assume TSMC is some unknown tiny company, often the same ones who proclaim Apple fan boys are ignorant and how amazing Samsung is.

They all need lower-power-higher-performance SoCs for their next products in their pipelines. And Samsung can make those while TSMC who used to make 20nm class products can't. Why hesitate to switch to Samsung then?

Who says Apple will hesitate? Apple switched from Samsung to TSMC because TSMC had much better technology and capacity to supply 20nm processors. If GlobalFoundries/Samsung can supply 14nm better than TSMC and things fit their schedule, they'll switch. However that doesn't mean TSMC is particularly behind. They are ahead in 20nm, and who says they cannot come back in the next process even if they are behind in 14nm?

And about A8 chip production sharing with Samsung, how do you think we figure out who manufactured the chip? Apple never announce or confirm.

Chipworks already confirmed the A8 is built by TSMC.

You never know whether TSMC manufactures all the A8 chips or not, not to speak of the proportion between TSMC and Samsung in case Samsung manufactured some portion of them unless the disassembler aforementioned disassemble considerable amount of devices from various regions.

The fact you're wondering why Apple wouldn't use two very different fabs for a chip is just baffling, or tells me you're simply ignorant. Why do you think nobody else uses two fabs for a same processor?

 

[procol]

That doesn't make any sense. You don't care about TSMC because they aren't leading in technology but in the same sentence you say you don't care about them being a leader with the 20nm process even though that's the cutting edge? For your argument to make any sense, TSMC has to be failing with 20nm and even 28nm. But TSMC is having huge success with them.

Basically you already made your up mind - TSMC cannot be good - and trying really hard to make the evidence fit your foregone conclusion. That's not how this works. Unfortunately at Macrumors there are many who assume TSMC is some unknown tiny company, often the same ones who proclaim Apple fan boys are ignorant and how amazing Samsung is.



Who says Apple will hesitate? Apple switched from Samsung to TSMC because TSMC had much better technology and capacity to supply 20nm processors. If GlobalFoundries/Samsung can supply 14nm better than TSMC and things fit their schedule, they'll switch. However that doesn't mean TSMC is particularly behind. They are ahead in 20nm, and who says they cannot come back in the next process even if they are behind in 14nm?



Chipworks already confirmed the A8 is built by TSMC.




The fact you're wondering why Apple wouldn't use two very different fabs for a chip is just baffling, or tells me you're simply ignorant. Why do you think nobody else uses two fabs for a same processor?

I think you got some problem with reading or are in sort of RDF. Why don't you accept the fact TSMC's shift to 10nm class is delaying? That's the very problem here. How can you call TSMC's 20+ nm products "cutting edge" despite Samsung and Intel had prepared the below 20nm process already and plan to mass-produce with it soon. What you call "cutting edge" is not cutting edge any more, not to mention "next-gen." It's just the current and soon-to-be-old technology.

You said I made up my mind that TSMC can't be good. Why I have to make my mind as such? As someone has pointed out, TSMC is Walmart of fabrication business. That's widely known fact. They have been strong in quantity, not quality. That's been the way they make a profit. I just mentioned some of the widely accepted facts. Apple determined to have 20nm-process chips for iPhone 6 and 6+ and they thought even TSMC could handle fabbing those SoCs then. Samsung could shift to 14nm process without problem by skipping Apple's A8 order and Apple will get enough 14nm-process SoCs for their next generation from Samsung and GlobalFoundries when they need those. This was win-win as planned and that's why TSMC managed to get the orders for this generation SoCs.

You're trying to defend TSMC so desperately. Accept the reality. You seem to have strong belief in TSMC as you said TSMC could come back with below 20nm products. That may happen in the future. But for the present, it didn't happen yet. Of course, Samsung and Intel will not just wait for TSMC to catch up. They will go further. Actually, it's known that TSMC's future plan is focused on 16nm process, but the industry insiders are well aware of that's not the true below-20nm tech based process but just 20nm-process-tech based with some advanced tweaks.

About A8 chip production. I don't know what you are talking about. I myself already mentioned about Chipworks. (Because you seem to read and quote only the first sentence for some reason, I kindly repeat the part below for you.) I already know Chipworks disassembled some iPhones to confirm TSMC manufacted A8. That means TSMC is whether the sole supplier or at least one of the suppliers. What I said is to settle that all A8 SoCs were fabbed by TSMC, those disassemblers have to disassemble big enough iPhone samples from various regions.

And about A8 chip production sharing with Samsung, how do you think we figure out who manufactured the chip? Apple never announce or confirm. Usually hardware-focused group like Chipworks or sometimes more professional media like Anandtech and Ars technica disassemble the chip itself physically and figures out indirectly without any official confirmation from Apple or fab companies. You never know whether TSMC manufactures all the A8 chips or not, not to speak of the proportion between TSMC and Samsung in case Samsung manufactured some portion of them unless the disassembler aforementioned disassemble considerable amount of devices from various regions.

Anyway, I didn't said that TSMC never manufactured A8 SoC's as you mentined like I did. What I said is you can't exclude the possibility of Samsung having fabbed some portion of A8 because the A8 demand from Apple as a whole is very big and Apple usually tend to have multiple suppliers for the every parts. As Apple didn't inform us some iPhones have TLC memory while others have MLC even though they are the same iPhone model, the truth is yet to be discovered.

You're missing or disregarding my point on purpse. I don't know why but you just keep repeating what I said already and pretend to refute my post successfully by adding already mentioned facts, even some of which are mentioned by none other than me.

 

[fertilized-egg]

How can you call TSMC's 20+ nm products "cutting edge" despite Samsung and Intel had prepared the below 20nm process already and plan to mass-produce with it soon.

Because the 20nm products are the smallest process for non-memory chips in mass production outside Intel chips? Cutting edge means it's the latest & greatest.

What you call "cutting edge" is not cutting edge any more, not to mention "next-gen." It's just the current and soon-to-be-old technology.

You can begin by naming me these amazing Samsung chips that are below 20 nm and available. If there isn't one, yes, 20nm is cutting edge. It's not like 20nm has been around for that long either.

As someone has pointed out, TSMC is Walmart of fabrication business. That's widely known fact.

"Widely known fact" by you and the other guy in this thread, sure.

You're trying to defend TSMC so desperately. Accept the reality. You seem to have strong belief in TSMC as you said TSMC could come back with below 20nm products. That may happen in the future.

Why do I need to accept the reality when everyone is using TSMC chips already? I don't need to "believe" it. I just need to list the products that are using TSMC chips. I'm willing to change my opinion depending on what's happening around me, how about you?

But for the present, it didn't happen yet.

Oh the irony. Who's making the ARM processors in the smallest process right now? Who makes the Playstation chips and nVidia graphic card chips right now? Who makes the majority processors for Samsung Galaxy S and Note phones? Who makes all of them right now? Not in the future, the present. I wonder who's making all of them right now.

That's called the "present".

About A8 chip production. I don't know what you are talking about. I myself already mentioned about Chipworks.

And you mentioned if I have proof for TSMC's involvement, and I showed it to you. A real fact, not like your fact where apparently things are "widely known" if you believe in it.

I already know Chipworks disassembled some iPhones to confirm TSMC manufacted A8. That means TSMC is whether the sole supplier or at least one of the suppliers. What I said is to settle that all A8 SoCs were fabbed by TSMC, those disassemblers have to disassemble big enough iPhone samples from various regions.

OK. This is where I begin to have a real problem with your lack of knowledge. That's just a clueless statement. This is not Samsung using different processors for phones in different regions. Regions have nothing to do with who fabbed the chips in iPhone's case.

What I said is you can't exclude the possibility of Samsung having fabbed some portion of A8 because the A8 demand from Apple as a whole is very big and Apple usually tend to have multiple suppliers for the every parts.

Yes you can. If you don't understand why you can exclude the possibility of the same A8 chip being made by both TSMC and Samsung, that's precisely the problem.

As Apple didn't inform us some iPhones have TLC memory while others have MLC even though they are the same iPhone model, the truth is yet to be discovered.

And you're comparing SoCs to flash memories. I'm really confused if you're playing dumb, or really that clueless on why processors are not made in multiple fabs.

You're missing or disregarding my point on purpse. I don't know why but you just keep repeating what I said already and pretend to refute my post successfully by adding already mentioned facts, even some of which are mentioned by none other than me.

Seriously, please pay close attention to my last few points. Again see if there's a single company who gets the same processor made in two different fabs, and ask yourself why no one does it. Why do you think Qualcomm, nVidia, AMD, etc all use TSMC only? Why aren't they sourcing the chips from multiple fabs? Is it because they are all Walmart shoppers? I'm just flabbergasted by your ignorance.

 

[procol]

And you mentioned if I have proof for TSMC's involvement, and I showed it to you.

Did I? Quote the part. You just showed what I didn't ask as if I denied the involvement of TSMC regarding A8 SoCs at all from the start. Why don't you read thoroughly what the others wrote before you write something?

And you're comparing SoCs to flash memories. I'm really confused if you're playing dumb, or really that clueless on why processors are not made in multiple fabs.

The reason I brought up the TLC/MLC situation of iPhone 6 and 6+ is not to compare memory chip and SoCs, it's to remind you that Apple always do things to maximize their profit and they don't acknowledge the behind-the-scene facts to end users.

If you insist 20nm is "cutting edge" because Samsung or the other SoC makers have yet to deliver the 10nm-class-process-based SoCs to the market, the same can be said for A8 SoCs. You can't deny completely the multiple outsourcing possibility of A8 because nobody brought up the actual proof yet. Chipworks' disassembly of some sample iPhones can't guarantee TSMC is the sole supplier. Unlike memory chips which are made by standard for general purpose, multiple outsourcing of SoCs is rare but it's not impossible. If Apple can use TLCs from Sandisk with MLCs from SK Hynix and Toshiba to fill the required quantity, and exploit the caching trick to conceal TLC's low performance, you can't conclude as such. As in the case with the use of both TLC and MLC for the same model, if the performances of SoCs from different suppliers are in the vicinity of expected range, you can adopt both. (Though Samsung decreased the 20nm lines much, Exynos 5 Octa 5430 for their Galaxy Alpha and Exynos 7 Octa 7410 for Galaxy Note 4 and Edge are fabbed by their 20nm HKMG process. This means Samsung still maintain some 20nm lines and take the 20nm process SoCs order from the client if it's small volume.) The speculation of Samsung and TSMC will share the production of A8 have been around for long, and there isn't any confirmation nor denial because nobody can suggest the proof of facts whether it's positive or negative.

For the rest, take as much pride in TSMC as you wish. Unlike you, even the chairman of TSMC admitted they are falling behind in the below 20nm process, i.e 10nm-class process, adding the hope of catching up the competitors in the future to soothe their investors.

I added the link to the article in the original post and I don't know whether you read it or not. I insert the first half of the article below for your convenience.

The sistuation for the next generation will not be that much different, Samsung and GlobalFoundries will make 14nm FinFET to fill the demand from Apple and others, a year or so later, TSMC will come up with tons of 16nm products(in essence, based on 20nm process tech with some tweak) to flood the mid-tier market. Samsung and the other foundries will go ahead with more advanced technology by then. It's not only my speculation but what the chairman of TSMC said(the first paragraph of the article). TSMC want to be a so-called market leader (yes, with quantity) in 2016 not 2015. They are lagging in tech but hope to be the market leader with volume as they have always been.

http://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/4380/tsmc-to-fall-behind-rivals-in-finfet-market-share

Morris Chang, chairman of foundry Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (Hsinchu, Taiwan), has told analysts that his company would likely fall behind a "major competitor" in foundry market share for 16nm/14nm FinFET node in 2015, but would then go on to be market leader at 16nm/14nm in 2016 and subsequent years.

This is despite the fact that TSMC has reportedly just started shipping application processors for Apple and reported record revenue and profits for the second quarter of 2014.

That major competitor is taken to be Samsung by observers although Chang did not specifically mention the South Korean company. Samsung is working in partnership with Globalfoundries Inc. to supply the Samsung-developed 14LPE and 14LPP processes to customers as a matter of urgency. Both companies expect to be in volume production before the end of 2014 (see Samsung, Globalfoundries Form 14nm Alliance to Fight TSMC)

The reason why TSMC will be eclipsed, albeit temporarily in Chang's view, is because it has committed itself to 20nm planar CMOS production while the "major competitor" has skipped the 20nm node, Chang said. "We got started a little late because we chose to also do 20nm."

But Chang said that the steady progress of working on 20nm first and then moving relatively quickly to 16nm FinFET would bring long-term success. Chang added: "In my mind the 16nm battle has already been fought. For me the looming battle is 10nm but I am not going to say anything about it today."

However, Chang did say that on technical grounds TSMC believes its 10nm process is competitive, being 25 percent faster, 45 percent low power than the 16nm FinFET process and offering 2.2 times the gate density of the 16nm process. He also added that customer tape-outs for the 10nm FinFET node are scheduled to happen in the second half of 2015.

Chang was speaking to analysts on a conference call and meeting held to discuss TSMC's record-breaking second quarter financial results.

 

[DeathChill]

The situation is in no way similar to TLC/MLC. As I understand it MAJOR work in design and execution is required for a processor to be fabbed by a specific fab plant. You have to design around the process of that fab and can't simply bring it to a different fab, hence why no processor is fabbed by multiple fab companies.

 

[fertilized-egg]

Chipworks' disassembly of some sample iPhones can't guarantee TSMC is the sole supplier. Unlike memory chips which are made by standard for general purpose, multiple outsourcing of SoCs is rare but it's not impossible.

Sigh. I don't know how many times I have to repeat it to you. You said it's "rare", name me one example. It seems you have no idea why that's so. That's my problem with your postings, the painfully obvious ignorance, combined with an oddly strong opinion that has no factual basis.

Name me a single company, one processor or graphic card chip, that uses multiple fabs for a single processor.

Why do you think AMD and nVidia all have been using TSMC for their graphic chips, which are extremely demanding? If, as you claimed, TSMC is a low supplier without technical merit, how are AMD and nVidia have been using TSMC as their exclusive fab for even the expensive graphic chips?

We have two possibilities:

1) AMD and nVidia are crazy or dumb. They do not know TSMC is low quality and Samsung is better. They must have been not paying attention to the fact that is "widely known" as you've claimed.

2) Maybe AMD and nVidia aren't crazy or dumb. Maybe TSMC is really the only one capable of making large complicated graphic chips to the designs of nVidia and AMD presently.

it's to remind you that Apple always do things to maximize their profit and they don't acknowledge the behind-the-scene facts to end users.

I'm sure other companies can skip using cheap supplier like TSMC. Please tell AMD, nVidia, Samsung, Sony, Microsoft, LG, etc, etc that they should stop using TSMC-fabbed chips in their flagship products. The fact TSMC is a bad supplier is "widely known" according to you, just by none of the technology companies apparently.

For the rest, take as much pride in TSMC as you wish.

Why would I take "pride" in TSMC? I'm simply stating the fact that they are the present leader in the industry, by far, and have been for many years. If GloFo/Samsung takes the lead next year, sure, that's great for them and Apple SHOULD move to them.

But are you seriously arguing TSMC is not the current leader? Wait, don't answer that, you think TSMC is like Walmart of fabs, obviously a sentiment not shared by the clients using TSMC. It's pretty obvious either you really despise TSMC for whatever reason, or you dream of Chairman Lee giving you a tour of Samsung's new 14nm node every night. That does not change the fact TSMC is the clear current leader in the fab industry.

On top of all that you seriously claim Apple might have some hidden A8 chips in iPhones that have been made by Samsung even though you have absolutely no proof. Now, again, please tell me a SINGLE processor that's fabbed by multiple fabs.

The situation is in no way similar to TLC/MLC. As I understand it MAJOR work in design and execution is required for a processor to be fabbed by a specific fab plant. You have to design around the process of that fab and can't simply bring it to a different fab, hence why no processor is fabbed by multiple fab companies.

Exactly. If Apple has done it with no obvious performance penalty, that's a great feat I'd think. I can't think of any company who managed to have a chip this complicated fabbed by multiple fabs. Ironically this is probably why Samsung synced their 14nm process with GlobalFoundries even though presumably it meant sharing a ton of their trade secret with GloFo. They just had to offer something different to attract clients away from TSMC.

 

[KPandian1]

Samsung is govrnment owned? Wow. Didnt know that.

Always a good laugh.

I am wrong, no excuses for what I wrote. Sorry.

 

[Antares]

You should get a job in the Apple marketing department.

I would love that! I seriously would quit my job, immediately, and move across the country if I was able to get a job at Apple. No questions questions asked. No doubt, whatsoever.

 

[RockSpider]

I would love that! I seriously would quit my job, immediately, and move across the country if I was able to get a job at Apple. No questions questions asked. No doubt, whatsoever.

Would you need to get paid, or would you do it for love, or a plate of milk.